|
Source: (consider it)
|
Thread: Hell: I am suspending my stance against the death penalty.
|
doctor-frog
small and green
# 2860
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Erin:
The absolute guarantee that he would not ever be able to molest another child again.
Am I not typing in English here?
Well, yes. But you're still not answering the questions put to you.
So lemme try again. Two questions.
First: you've suggested that torturing and killing the man/woman would be the way to ensure that s/he would never molest another child again. Why not just kill him/her? Doesn't that give the same guarantee? What do you accomplish by mutilating him/her first?
Second: Case study:
Myra Hindley. Molested and killed multiple children. Locked away in the 1960's. Still locked away. Universally reviled by the British Press to this day. Repeatedly denied any chance of parole by successive British Home Secretaries (of both parties), none of whom want to go down in history as "The Cabinet Minister Who Released Myra Hindley". Will always and evermore be denied parole, if for no other reason than this. She will most certainly die in prison.
She has never, to my knowledge, reoffended. Nor will she.
Now this seems to meet your demand for
quote:
Originally posted by Erin:
the absolutely unbreakable guarantee that he would never, ever be able to molest another child ever again. Which ...
... you then went on to emphasise ...
quote:
Originally posted by Erin:
IS my ONLY concern.
To repeat: concern met. Done and dusted.
Now, that said, would you advocate maiming Myra Hindley? If so, why? What would you stand to gain by doing so?
Following up on that, would you then advocate killing her? If so, why ... noting, in particular, that your
quote:
Originally posted by Erin:
ONLY concern
has already been dealt with?
Posts: 981 | From: UK | Registered: May 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
sharkshooter
Not your average shark
# 1589
|
Posted
The answer is easy for me - I have always believed in applying the death penalty in certain cases. This is only one of the times when I think it is totally appropriate.
I, however, think the torture part is not appropriate, and that the method of execution should cause a swift death like guillotine or firing squad.
--------------------
Let the words of my mouth, and the meditation of my heart, be acceptable in thy sight, O LORD, my strength, and my redeemer. [Psalm 19:14]
Posts: 7772 | From: Canada; Washington DC; Phoenix; it's complicated | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Erin
Meaner than Godzilla
# 2
|
Posted
quote:
She will most certainly die in prison.
Guarantee this, and then we'll talk.
--------------------
Commandment number one: shut the hell up.
Posts: 17140 | From: 330 miles north of paradise | Registered: Mar 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Scot
Deck hand
# 2095
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by simon 2:
Sometimes I wonder if peadophilia is the only crime (maybe even sin) that our culture is willing to say is evil.
<snip>
Society seems to want to object to evil behaviour and demand justice but nobody has the spine for it anymore.
I wish that our culture was uniformly willing to condemn it. I nominate the pedophilia apologists to share in the "10 minutes of justice."
And don't believe for a minute that nobody has a spine for dealing with this stuff anymore. We're just not in the majority at the moment.
--------------------
“Here, we are not afraid to follow truth wherever it may lead, nor tolerate any error so long as reason is left free to combat it.” - Thomas Jefferson
Posts: 9515 | From: Southern California | Registered: Jan 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
doctor-frog
small and green
# 2860
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Erin:
quote:
She will most certainly die in prison.
Guarantee this, and then we'll talk.
I guarantee.
Now answer the questions.
Posts: 981 | From: UK | Registered: May 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
doctor-frog
small and green
# 2860
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by texas.veggie:
quote:
Originally posted by Erin:
quote:
She will most certainly die in prison.
Guarantee this, and then we'll talk.
I guarantee.
Now answer the questions.
Including the one(s) about why you would maim someone *in addition* to killing them? (the latter of which is, admittedly, certainly a guarantee.)
Posts: 981 | From: UK | Registered: May 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Scot
Deck hand
# 2095
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by sharkshooter:
The answer is easy for me - I have always believed in applying the death penalty in certain cases. This is only one of the times when I think it is totally appropriate.
I, however, think the torture part is not appropriate, and that the method of execution should cause a swift death like guillotine or firing squad.
sharkshooter, I agree with you that death is the appropriate penalty in this case. I also agree that the torture part is not appropriate, but not because the child-rapist/murderer doesn't deserve it. It is society that is protected by a prohibition on torture, not the pedophile.
scot
--------------------
“Here, we are not afraid to follow truth wherever it may lead, nor tolerate any error so long as reason is left free to combat it.” - Thomas Jefferson
Posts: 9515 | From: Southern California | Registered: Jan 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
doctor-frog
small and green
# 2860
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Scot:
It is society that is protected by a prohibition on torture, not the pedophile.
not to mention our own humanity (amongst other things).
Posts: 981 | From: UK | Registered: May 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Erin
Meaner than Godzilla
# 2
|
Posted
Again: I AM answering the question. I am just not giving you an answer you like. Keeping someone in prison is no guarantee of anything. It is IMPOSSIBLE to guarantee that someone won't commit an act while they're still alive. Do you honestly not comprehend this, or are you being deliberately obtuse?
--------------------
Commandment number one: shut the hell up.
Posts: 17140 | From: 330 miles north of paradise | Registered: Mar 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
doctor-frog
small and green
# 2860
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Erin:
Again: I AM answering the question. I am just not giving you an answer you like. Keeping someone in prison is no guarantee of anything. It is IMPOSSIBLE to guarantee that someone won't commit an act while they're still alive. Do you honestly not comprehend this, or are you being deliberately obtuse?
In the first instance, you have most explictly *not* answered the question as to why you seem to advocate torture, as a separate issue, on top of killing the abuser. You have remained wholly silent on this one.
And in the second instance, as for the killing bit, I might ask the same of you: are you being deliberately obtuse? What part of "lock 'em up and throw away the key" are you not seeing? Drop 'em off on a desert island forever with no other human contact. Whatever. The point is not about how the laws now stand. The point is that we *could* construct the law in such a way that a person would be permanently imprisoned -- in which life actually meant life -- and therefore would never have the opportunity to come into contact with a child again. I even gave you a real-life example that has occurred with the laws we now have: this has actually happened in the case of Myra Hindley.
Can't you therefore just answer the question as to why killing the person would be preferable, even if you have your guarantee of life imprisonment only for the sake of argument?
sheesh!
Posts: 981 | From: UK | Registered: May 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Erin
Meaner than Godzilla
# 2
|
Posted
Christ almighty, would you read the friggin' posts? My point all along has been that the only way to guarantee that he will not commit similar acts is to kill the son of a bitch. You think that sentencing him to life imprisonment is an effective guarantee, I do not and WILL NOT accept that as equally effective, because there's NO GUARANTEE that he will stay there. You're talking theory, I'm talking reality. End of discussion on this point.
As to castrating and/or beating the tar out of him: I already said he deserves it. As I do not accept your life imprisonment theory, you did not accept this. Seems to me we've reached the end of the discussion on this point, too.
--------------------
Commandment number one: shut the hell up.
Posts: 17140 | From: 330 miles north of paradise | Registered: Mar 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
doctor-frog
small and green
# 2860
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Erin:
As to castrating and/or beating the tar out of him: I already said he deserves it. ... Seems to me we've reached the end of the discussion on this point, too.
well, yeh, probably. but, at long last, it did flag up one point that I had in mind: that your motive was not ONLY to guarantee that he'd never do it again.
Ultimately, I was trying to raise the issue of retribution as opposed to justice.
Maybe we (or someone else) could take it from there.
Posts: 981 | From: UK | Registered: May 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Erin
Meaner than Godzilla
# 2
|
Posted
If you think I'm going to let some little red commie have the last word... ![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
My motive in KILLING him was only to guarantee that he would not do it again. I never commented on my motive for beating the living shit out of him. My motives for beating the living shit out of him are that he's a total scumbag and he hurt a little girl in the worst way possible. I can only imagine what she went through -- how scared she was, if she ever realized that her parents couldn't save her -- ugh. I mean, really: what kind of sick bastard do you have to be, anyway?
--------------------
Commandment number one: shut the hell up.
Posts: 17140 | From: 330 miles north of paradise | Registered: Mar 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
doctor-frog
small and green
# 2860
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Erin:
I never commented on my motive for beating the living shit out of him.
errm... Didn't i say that to you about about three times already?! ![[Flaming]](graemlins/angryfire.gif)
quote:
Originally posted by Erin:
If you think I'm going to let some little red commie have the last word...
Oh, I can play this game in spades, sweetheart! ![[Devil]](graemlins/devil.gif)
Posts: 981 | From: UK | Registered: May 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
doctor-frog
small and green
# 2860
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Erin:
I mean, really: what kind of sick bastard do you have to be, anyway?
(Deserved a separate, more serious post.)
-sigh- I just don't know.
Someone commented at the beginning of the thread about how sadly depraved we human beings can be. It's true, of course, and God only knows I wish I had some easy answer for it.
Posts: 981 | From: UK | Registered: May 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Black Dog
Shipmate
# 2344
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Erin:
Again: I AM answering the question. I am just not giving you an answer you like. Keeping someone in prison is no guarantee of anything. It is IMPOSSIBLE to guarantee that someone won't commit an act while they're still alive. Do you honestly not comprehend this, or are you being deliberately obtuse?
Well wonders never cease! The first time that I have ever agreed with old aligator features!
Thats the thing about the death penalty, because people do not like the idea, they automaticly think it wrong. Not so, sure the death penalty is bad, taking a human life is never an easy decision to make, but under these circumstances we have to view these people as monsters and not human beings. Putting them in prison is well and good, but how do we know they are getting the punishment they deserve? If we lock them away in some hole without contact to the outside world, the PC brigade would start rambling on about human rights.
The only plausible arguement against the death penalty is that killing someone off means that we often forget about their wickedness, perhaps leading us to be less aware of the horrors that the world brings forth. If Hindley and Brady were executed they would not be the standout example of evil that they partook in. Would we be as aware to the threat of such people? I have thought about it and i think it is a difficult choice to make, but when you realise the pain and suffering that they brought both physically and mentally, death seems a fair end to their worthless exsistence.
People say we, as humans have no right to take human life. But God wants us to fight off the devil and the evil that he brings. We have seen it in Nazi Germany, and we fought it off. And we must also see these child molesters as being pure evil and by bringing about the death penalty we are fighting the evil that is inside them, they are a hollow shell, not human but i think the devil incarnate.
What rights does this evil have on this earth?
--------------------
The difference between love and comfort is that comfort is more reliable and true. Brutal and mocking but always there it is a crutch for enmity's saddest glare.
Posts: 453 | Registered: Feb 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
doctor-frog
small and green
# 2860
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by thethinker:
but under these circumstances we have to view these people as monsters and not human beings.
just out of curiosity, where would you draw that line?
Posts: 981 | From: UK | Registered: May 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
ChastMastr
Shipmate
# 716
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by thethinker:
Well wonders never cease! The first time that I have ever agreed with old aligator features!
It's. The. End. Of. The. World. (Words capitalised and separated by periods are © Tomb. All. Rights. Reserved.) ![[Eek!]](eek.gif)
Myself, I believe that people who murder anyone deserve the death penalty, but that it should be in as simple and quick a manner as possible (I don't go in for the whole lethal injection or electric chair thing -- firing squad would do well, or cutting off their heads, or hanging). Standard thing about giving them time, if desired, with clergy of their religion to try to prepare for death beforehand, of course.
But it's a bit late for that now as The. World. Is. Ending. Soon.™
AIIEEEEEEE!
David
orthodox secret master of AIIEEEEEEE!
--------------------
My essays on comics continuity: http://chastmastr.tumblr.com/tagged/continuity
Posts: 14068 | From: Clearwater, Florida | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
duchess
Ship's Blue Blooded Lady
# 2764
|
Posted
Quakers are totally against the death penalty though and so are theBaptists don't agree with the death penalty...the Pope says Death Penalty is "Cruel"
Douglas Wilson and other Reformed Christian Theologians and other Reformed Theologians are pro-death penalty.
I am pro-death penalty since I feel it is bibical. Since I am not a Dispensationalist, I do feel that the OT was replaced by the NT but rather the OT was a shadow of things to come with Christ.
--------------------
♬♭ We're setting sail to the place on the map from which nobody has ever returned ♫♪♮
Ship of Fools-World Party
Posts: 11197 | From: Do you know the way? | Registered: May 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Sarkycow
La belle Dame sans merci
# 1012
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by texas.veggie:
quote:
Originally posted by thethinker:
but under these circumstances we have to view these people as monsters and not human beings.
just out of curiosity, where would you draw that line?
Monsters steal innocence, destroy children.
Viki
--------------------
“Just because your voice reaches halfway around the world doesn't mean you are wiser than when it reached only to the end of the bar.”
Posts: 10787 | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Erin
Meaner than Godzilla
# 2
|
Posted
I think what probably clinched this one for me was the police interview with the little girl she was playing with: "and then he stole my friend". Good Lord, almost as heartbreaking as the kid who asked "Mom, what did we do wrong?" just before that bitch in Texas drowned him.
--------------------
Commandment number one: shut the hell up.
Posts: 17140 | From: 330 miles north of paradise | Registered: Mar 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
duchess
Ship's Blue Blooded Lady
# 2764
|
Posted
Erin, the fact that the brother ran out after he saw his darling sibling drowned in the water...and she chased after him and drowned him also. That made me lose it.
Or the fact that the too little ones drowned in the car...there were signs that the older one was trying to free himself and his baby brother...
Or the car jacker who took off with a toddler who when his mom tried to get out and ended up dragged by the jeep and died being dragged. Saw that on American's Most Wanted.
How can somebody kill an innocent child? I would rather throw myself in front of a speeding car and die than see my niece and nephews hurt at all.
I just can't stand it. DEATH PENALTY! Many of these guys are REPEAT offenders. DEATH PENALTY.
Totally bibical IMHO and totally well-deserved.
--------------------
♬♭ We're setting sail to the place on the map from which nobody has ever returned ♫♪♮
Ship of Fools-World Party
Posts: 11197 | From: Do you know the way? | Registered: May 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Scot
Deck hand
# 2095
|
Posted
I'm not known for being overly... *ahem* sensitive. But whenever I think of those poor boys in Texas and the fear they must have felt it just breaks me. It's the same with Samantha Runnion. And Danielle van Damme. I look at them and I see my kids. Samantha even looks a bit like my little girl.
It's horrible when kids are killed and even worse when they suffer. But in my view the worst part is the fear they must feel. Young children are naturally so trusting - to violate that trust in the worst imaginable ways feels like the death of all that is good.
Yes, I would throw the switch, pull the trigger, swing the bat, strangle the bastard with my own hands. I wouldn't think twice, and I wouldn't regret it. If only the next child doesn't get hurt.
scot
--------------------
“Here, we are not afraid to follow truth wherever it may lead, nor tolerate any error so long as reason is left free to combat it.” - Thomas Jefferson
Posts: 9515 | From: Southern California | Registered: Jan 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
doctor-frog
small and green
# 2860
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by sarkycow:
quote:
Originally posted by texas.veggie:
quote:
Originally posted by thethinker:
but under these circumstances we have to view these people as monsters and not human beings.
just out of curiosity, where would you draw that line?
Monsters steal innocence, destroy children.
Yes, but I'm suggesting that when you start distinguishing between human beings and monsters (as opposed to human beings and human beings who perform monstrous acts), then where you draw the line becomes arbitrary and subjective ... and that can be a dangerous thing that, ultimately, puts all our civil liberties at risk. What's to stop the Powers That Be for coming after you and giving you the "monster treatment" for, say, jay-walking? Theoretically, nothing. The question, then, becomes: who is entitled to treatment as a human being, who is not? What accusations of crime entitle you to a human trial; and which ones entitle you to a show trial. Can a person be a monster before the trial, or only after being found guilty? What about an inconclusive verdict ... what legal standing has he/she then? Which crimes qualify as "monstor crimes", and who specifically decides this? Can thinking about the crime with no subsequent action be considered criminal? Can the line be moved? And for what reasons? Who makes that decision?
Can: open. Worms: everywhere.
There was a time when the FBI and the CIA considered people like me -- avowed socialists -- to be monsters who threatened the very fabric of Amreican life, merely for the political choices we made. They had carte blanche to treat us as such ... and they did ... just because they could ... because they were allowed to make that distinction, and because no one would hold them to account.
Don't get me wrong: I'm all for ensuring that paedophiles get locked away for a long time and never have access to children again. I'm all for ensuring that children are made safe. And I'm all for bringing home to the perpetrator the monstrosity of their crime.
It's just that when we start going down that particular road on the way to doing so -- i.e., distinguishing between human beings who, because of who they are, may or may not deserve equal treatment under law -- it's very hard indeed to guarantee where it will finally end.
Posts: 981 | From: UK | Registered: May 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
gandalf35
Shipmate
# 934
|
Posted
I think anyone who thinks our penal system is based on reformation, is very nieve. It has always been about retribution. Deterence? get real. If we want deterence then we have the death penalty for any legal infraction commited by anyone over the subjective age of twelve. Do you realise that there are proven remedies for any number of criminal behaviors. The problem is that te cost of implimenting these would bankrupt us and we would not get the satisfaction of seeing those people suffer for their crimes. Good lord, even chimps kill for the benefit of their community.
--------------------
Life is like a bowl of cherries... Mmmm cherries...
Posts: 185 | From: If hell exists, I live there. | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
doctor-frog
small and green
# 2860
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by gandalf35:
... we would not get the satisfaction of seeing those people suffer for their crimes.
... which sort of makes me glad that Jesus wasn't born as a 20th century American. That whole business about free grace for sinners probably would have taken on a completely different tone ...
Posts: 981 | From: UK | Registered: May 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
gandalf35
Shipmate
# 934
|
Posted
What does this have to do with Jesus, and why do you think his motivation would have changed from then to now. Our feelings on this have nothing to do with his teachings. There is no justification for this in the NT.
--------------------
Life is like a bowl of cherries... Mmmm cherries...
Posts: 185 | From: If hell exists, I live there. | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
doctor-frog
small and green
# 2860
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by gandalf35:
Good lord, even chimps kill for the benefit of their community.
I'm not sure that's a road you really want to be going down. After all, they also fling faeces at each other and generally forget to wash their hands before dinner ... ![[Snigger]](graemlins/snigger.gif)
Seriously, though. Sure, like all of you, my gut reaction when I read any of these (increasinly common) stories is that I'd love to get my sweaty little hands round the sorry little neck of anyone who'd do things like that to a child. That's my gut-level reaction.
But I do also think that God calls us to to react in a way more profound than just the gut-level ... not least in the words of Romans 12.14-21. This doesn't mean play it stupid. (Christ tells us to be "wise like serpents", too.) But the whole world already pretty much takes chimpanzees as their model. That's the easy bit: even Peter himself cut the ear off the slave who came to take Christ away. Mercy doesn't really become mercy till it's hard to give. It was Christ who put the ear back on.
Posts: 981 | From: UK | Registered: May 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
doctor-frog
small and green
# 2860
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by gandalf35:
What does this have to do with Jesus, and why do you think his motivation would have changed from then to now. Our feelings on this have nothing to do with his teachings. There is no justification for this in the NT.
My point was that if God took the same kind of delight that Americans do in seeing sinners get their pay-backs, we'd all be screwed.
Posts: 981 | From: UK | Registered: May 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Moth
Shipmate
# 2589
|
Posted
Thanks, Texas Veggie, for arguing the points I would have liked to make so much better than I could.
I have been avoiding posting on this thread because I find it too upsetting. The crimes are horrible. But the idea that any person is a 'monster' is more horrible still. That way lies the gas chamber filled with homosexuals, gypsies and Jews. That way lies the regime lead by the Taliban.
I was going to suggest crucifixion as the penalty, and ask whether any bleeding heart liberal would be prepared to suffer it in his place. But perhaps that's a cheap shot.
Surely Christ died for all sinners, no matter how abhorrent their sins? Surely He warned us in the parable of the Pharisee and the tax collector not to think that our sins are somehow more acceptable than someone else's?
--------------------
"There are governments that burn books, and then there are those that sell the libraries and shut the universities to anyone who can't pay for a key." Laurie Penny.
Posts: 3446 | From: England | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
gandalf35
Shipmate
# 934
|
Posted
Every time I try to post a reply the ship locks up on me. Hmmm... hint maybe?
My point is to get Jesus out of the argument. He does not belong there. This has nothing to do with him, just with our sense of retribution not a sense of justice. How many times have we seen extreamist Christians (Fundies and others) crying out for blood at executions.
If you want retribution then call it that, don't drag Jesus into it. ![[Mad]](mad.gif)
BTW I often fling faeces at others and since I am a man I never wash my hands ![[Wink]](wink.gif) .
--------------------
Life is like a bowl of cherries... Mmmm cherries...
Posts: 185 | From: If hell exists, I live there. | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
gandalf35
Shipmate
# 934
|
Posted
Sorry about the double po
--------------------
Life is like a bowl of cherries... Mmmm cherries...
Posts: 185 | From: If hell exists, I live there. | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
doctor-frog
small and green
# 2860
|
Posted
Oh, I see. We're on more or less the same side, then? Perhaps I mis-read your earlier post.
quote:
Originally posted by gandalf35:
If you want retribution then call it that, don't drag Jesus into it.
Well, yes. Precisely.
Posts: 981 | From: UK | Registered: May 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
simon 2
Shipmate
# 1524
|
Posted
For me Jesus has everything to do with how I feel on this subject. My heart reaction is, mess them up really bad, tatoo molester on their forhead and throw them into the roughest jail around, in a shared cell. But God says that vengence is his, and not mine. So my opinion is changed, by my faith and my interpretation of what the Bible says.
So people believe it is ok for us to make society safe and then to punish, but for me it isn't ok to punish.
I can't think of any of the names, but there have been so many people released this year due to miscarriages of justice. Many of them were in for life and they are now old men, robbed of their life. Were they to have been executed we would have been guilty of demanding a second murder as revenge.
--------------------
sorry for my spelling and bad gramma
Posts: 495 | From: in a forest | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Erin
Meaner than Godzilla
# 2
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Moth:
I have been avoiding posting on this thread because I find it too upsetting. The crimes are horrible. But the idea that any person is a 'monster' is more horrible still. That way lies the gas chamber filled with homosexuals, gypsies and Jews. That way lies the regime lead by the Taliban.
Utter bullshit. Or are you, unlike the rest of us, really unable to tell the difference between who someone is and the crimes they commit?
quote:
Originally posted by Moth:
Surely Christ died for all sinners, no matter how abhorrent their sins? Surely He warned us in the parable of the Pharisee and the tax collector not to think that our sins are somehow more acceptable than someone else's?
And if we were talking about whether or not the guy could be forgiven, this would make sense. We're not talking about SINS, we're talking about CRIMINAL ACTS. There is a difference.
--------------------
Commandment number one: shut the hell up.
Posts: 17140 | From: 330 miles north of paradise | Registered: Mar 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Chorister
Completely Frocked
# 473
|
Posted
But doesn't He also say it would be better for him if a millstone was put around his neck and drowned? (Matt. 18v.6 - concordances are wonderful things.........)
I suppose if the alternative was a prison lynching the millstone treatment would be kinder.
--------------------
Retired, sitting back and watching others for a change.
Posts: 34626 | From: Cream Tealand | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
doctor-frog
small and green
# 2860
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by simon 2:
For me Jesus has everything to do with how I feel on this subject.
If i may take the liberty of interpreting Gandalf?
What I gather was being said was that when we act on the gut-level feeling of wanting to mess such criminals up, Jesus has nothing to do with that, and it's wrong to drag him into it as a self-justification of that kind of behaviour (i.e. -- acting on feeling, instead of acting on the Gospel of showing more mercy to them than they would to us).
Posts: 981 | From: UK | Registered: May 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
simon 2
Shipmate
# 1524
|
Posted
Aha, please excused my slow wittedness.
Innocent
--------------------
sorry for my spelling and bad gramma
Posts: 495 | From: in a forest | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
simon 2
Shipmate
# 1524
|
Posted
Agghhhh double stupidity I pressed the wrong button and sent the reply rather than including a URL.
Innocent are an organisation trying to over turn miscarriages of justice in the UK, several people on this site seem to have been convicted of abusing and murdering children, and possibly on very bad evidence. If they are innocent the death penalty would have been an irreversible punishment, and all because our society calls for blood rather than justice. Is the state murder of innocents a worth while price to pay so that we can have the blood vengence and safety we require?
--------------------
sorry for my spelling and bad gramma
Posts: 495 | From: in a forest | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Moth
Shipmate
# 2589
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Erin:
quote:
Originally posted by Moth:
I have been avoiding posting on this thread because I find it too upsetting. The crimes are horrible. But the idea that any person is a 'monster' is more horrible still. That way lies the gas chamber filled with homosexuals, gypsies and Jews. That way lies the regime lead by the Taliban.
Utter bullshit. Or are you, unlike the rest of us, really unable to tell the difference between who someone is and the crimes they commit?
quote:
Originally posted by Moth:
Surely Christ died for all sinners, no matter how abhorrent their sins? Surely He warned us in the parable of the Pharisee and the tax collector not to think that our sins are somehow more acceptable than someone else's?
And if we were talking about whether or not the guy could be forgiven, this would make sense. We're not talking about SINS, we're talking about CRIMINAL ACTS. There is a difference.
Erin, in most western countries buggery was a crime until very recently. I well remember my own grandfather ranting about homosexuals in very similar terms to those used on this thread. He thought they corrupted the young (worse than killing them - causing them to be cast into hell) and spread appalling diseases. He also thought they had deliberately chosen to be homosexual.
Hitler justified what he did to the gypsies and the Jews on the grounds that they were not really human, they were less than that. It is a short step from 'you are not worthy to be treated as a human because of what you have done' to 'all people of your type are not worthy to be treated as humans'. I know that you appreciate the difference, but a lot of people don't.
I appreciate there is a difference between criminal acts and sins. Once a society has decided that an act is criminal, offenders are liable to punishment for committing it. But I just can't quite imagine Christ sitting about with his disciples discussing nastier and better ways to torture people, and it worries me when Christians start down this road. I would like to see the content of any law informed by religion.
Clearly, you and I are never going to agree on this point. I feel as passionately about human rights as you do about this murder. The very idea that anyone could advocate gruesome torture as sanctioned by law and right is utterly abhorrent to me. To me, it is the antithesis of law, civilisation, or moral right. You clearly disagree, and I respect your right to do so.
The total of nastiness, ugliness and sin in this world is so great that I would not want to add to it by one iota. I most respect Christians like Corrie Ten Boom, who could pray for the Nazis who occupied her land, and killed her father and sister, and who refused to see them as other than men made in the image of God.
In this country a similar abduction and murder by a paedophile led to riots in certain cities, the driving out of men who might or might not have been paedophiles, and culminated in the home of a paediatrician being attacked due to a fundamental misunderstanding of the meaning of that word. The fear now is that no paedophile dare ever ask for help in overcoming his inclinations. It is a taboo subject. The mere allegation is enough to get you hounded out of town, even if it is not true.
The man who committed this crime did something about as loathsome as it gets. But he is still a man, not a monster or demon.
--------------------
"There are governments that burn books, and then there are those that sell the libraries and shut the universities to anyone who can't pay for a key." Laurie Penny.
Posts: 3446 | From: England | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Black Dog
Shipmate
# 2344
|
Posted
Moth what are you talking about?!!?
Hitler Killed the Jews, the disabled and gypsies out of pure predjudice. The 'crimes' that they committed was against the german people were in hitlers mind! Anything can be called a crime if you don't like it, I could say that your opinion on this subject was a crime.
But when we talk of actual criminal acts Paedophillia is perhaps the worst, and should be treated with the worst possible outcome. For Gods sake they are abusing children in the worst possible way! Sexualy abusing and murdering! I tell you what if its against Gods will to brandish the death penalty against these people then i'm going to have to go away and contemplate how i think of God.
I find it difficult to believe that Jesus and Jesus' disiples would have not looked towards the death penalty (in some instances), given the society that they lived in at the time. And whats that quote from jesus about those who abuse children should be cast into a bottomless pit? Help me out someone!?!
--------------------
The difference between love and comfort is that comfort is more reliable and true. Brutal and mocking but always there it is a crutch for enmity's saddest glare.
Posts: 453 | Registered: Feb 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Erin
Meaner than Godzilla
# 2
|
Posted
I am in perfect agreement about human rights, Moth. This guy surrendered his humanity card a long, long time ago.
--------------------
Commandment number one: shut the hell up.
Posts: 17140 | From: 330 miles north of paradise | Registered: Mar 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
doctor-frog
small and green
# 2860
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by thethinker:
I find it difficult to believe that Jesus and Jesus' disiples would have not looked towards the death penalty (in some instances), given the society that they lived in at the time. And whats that quote from jesus about those who abuse children should be cast into a bottomless pit? Help me out someone!?!
I always find it intriguing that people will defend the position that an all-loving God who himself suffered the death penalty would glibly condone inflicting it on all manner of miscreants without a second thought.
Posts: 981 | From: UK | Registered: May 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Moth
Shipmate
# 2589
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by thethinker:
Moth what are you talking about?!!?
Hitler Killed the Jews, the disabled and gypsies out of pure predjudice. The 'crimes' that they committed was against the german people were in hitlers mind! Anything can be called a crime if you don't like it, I could say that your opinion on this subject was a crime.
So who does decide what is a crime, and what is not, thethinker? Have you studied much jurispudence?
quote:
But when we talk of actual criminal acts Paedophillia is perhaps the worst, and should be treated with the worst possible outcome. For Gods sake they are abusing children in the worst possible way! Sexualy abusing and murdering! I tell you what if its against Gods will to brandish the death penalty against these people then i'm going to have to go away and contemplate how i think of God.
I find it difficult to believe that Jesus and Jesus' disiples would have not looked towards the death penalty (in some instances), given the society that they lived in at the time. And whats that quote from jesus about those who abuse children should be cast into a bottomless pit? Help me out someone!?!
I do not deny that paedophilia is a horrible, sickening offence. I also did not actually argue against the death penalty, although you would be right in assuming that I am, in fact, against it for a number of pragmatic reasons unconnected with this thread.
Jesus did indeed say (Matthew 18.6) 'But if anyone causes one of these little ones who believe in me to sin, it would be better for him to have a large millstone hung around his neck and to be drowned in the depths of the sea.' I interpret that to be about leading children away from faith, but you may interpret it as you wish. I sincerely hope it does mean that unrepentant paedophiles will receive their just desserts in hell.
--------------------
"There are governments that burn books, and then there are those that sell the libraries and shut the universities to anyone who can't pay for a key." Laurie Penny.
Posts: 3446 | From: England | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
doctor-frog
small and green
# 2860
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Erin:
I am in perfect agreement about human rights, Moth. This guy surrendered his humanity card a long, long time ago.
I would respectfully submit that you might not so much believe in human rights if in fact you think you have the right to pick and choose which humans are entitled to them and which ones are not.
Posts: 981 | From: UK | Registered: May 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Alaric the Goth
Shipmate
# 511
|
Posted
In Erin's opinion, and that of quite a few others on this thread, the man 'surrendered his humanity card'. I doubt very much that that is God's opinion of him.
In not just Hitler's opinion, but that of thousands, if not millions, of fellow Germans that were persuaded by his words, Jews, Gypsies etc. were not entitled to be considered fully human. Many people probably thought/think the same of homosexuals - my own father is probably of such an opinion, and I admit I myself used to hold that view.
Moth is making the point that, however sinful, or criminal, or 'weird' (in someone's opinion), a person do not cease to be human, and it is very dangerous to start referring to them as if that were the case.
This is not to say that I am necessarily against the death penalty. I was 'for' it (for muderers/terrorists etc.) before I became a Christian, then against it when I was persuaded by other Christians (Karl included) that it was wrong. My 'gut reaction' these days in certain cases is to be for it. My wife totally is against it, seeing executing someone as 'playing God' and taking 'Thou shalt not kill' to be the overriding command. She does think, hoewever, that a 'life' sentence should mean just that.
Posts: 3322 | From: West Thriding | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Erin
Meaner than Godzilla
# 2
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by texas.veggie:
quote:
Originally posted by Erin:
I am in perfect agreement about human rights, Moth. This guy surrendered his humanity card a long, long time ago.
I would respectfully submit that you might not so much believe in human rights if in fact you think you have the right to pick and choose which humans are entitled to them and which ones are not.
Wrong again. If you violate the rights of others, you forfeit your own rights. He chose to commit a capital crime in a state that employs capital punishment, knowing full well that if he were caught he would most likely be sentenced to death. He chose to sentence himself to death, why should I or anyone else negate that choice?
--------------------
Commandment number one: shut the hell up.
Posts: 17140 | From: 330 miles north of paradise | Registered: Mar 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
doctor-frog
small and green
# 2860
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Erin:
Wrong again. If you violate the rights of others, you forfeit your own rights. He chose to commit a capital crime in a state that employs capital punishment, knowing full well that if he were caught he would most likely be sentenced to death. He chose to sentence himself to death, why should I or anyone else negate that choice?
I fear we may end up quickly talking at cross-purposes again, Erin. So I'll leave that one, except for pointing out that just because something is the law doesn't make it right or decent or moral. (It was the law in Afghanistan that, at the risk of death, women couldn't leave the house without a male escort.)
But what about due process, at least? In this particular case, the one thing we haven't mentioned on this thread is the not inconsiderable fact that the man in question has not actually been found guilty in a court of law.
You've suggested he's no longer entitled to human treatment. Does this assumption therefore extend to due process? Can we legitimately deprive him of that?
Posts: 981 | From: UK | Registered: May 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Moo
Ship's tough old bird
# 107
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by gandalf35:
Do you realise that there are proven remedies for any number of criminal behaviors. The problem is that te cost of implimenting these would bankrupt us and we would not get the satisfaction of seeing those people suffer for their crimes.
For what criminal behaviors are there proven remedies, and what are those remedies?
Please be specific.
Moo
--------------------
Kerygmania host
---------------------
See you later, alligator.
Posts: 20365 | From: Alleghany Mountains of Virginia | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Moth
Shipmate
# 2589
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Erin:
quote:
Originally posted by texas.veggie:
quote:
Originally posted by Erin:
I am in perfect agreement about human rights, Moth. This guy surrendered his humanity card a long, long time ago.
I would respectfully submit that you might not so much believe in human rights if in fact you think you have the right to pick and choose which humans are entitled to them and which ones are not.
Wrong again. If you violate the rights of others, you forfeit your own rights. He chose to commit a capital crime in a state that employs capital punishment, knowing full well that if he were caught he would most likely be sentenced to death. He chose to sentence himself to death, why should I or anyone else negate that choice?
Presumably, Erin, he still has the rights granted to him by the Constitution of the United States, and in particular:
Amendment VIII
Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.
That would seem to rule out torture. I accept what you say about the death penalty.
A person does not forfeit all their rights on committing a crime, however heinous. They acquire a new and different set of rights, admirably set out in your constitution.
--------------------
"There are governments that burn books, and then there are those that sell the libraries and shut the universities to anyone who can't pay for a key." Laurie Penny.
Posts: 3446 | From: England | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
Printer-friendly view
